One question: Would you say the same about getting completely naked in public?

It is against the law. That means that society, as a whole, has decided that this is immoral.

No one forces you to stare at the girl

So that means that its morally okay to kill everyone who looks at me (“No one forces then to look at me!”)?

Why is your ethics enforceable, but other people’s aren’t?

Because ethics are only enforcable through laws and the laws currently enforce “my” ethics in that regard.

Why does she have less right to practice her ethical choice to expose her body (assuming by your answer you would have offense)?

Whether that is morally right is an ethical question but would you say the same about a minor (exposing themselves)?

Ethics is very subjective

Exactly, so what is the issue with the company having moral concerns about it and shutting it down?

Well, thank you for taking the time to write this detailed explanation!

Windows and MacOS use the abbriviation “MB” referring to the binary units, correct? How come that these big OS’s use another unit than these large international bodies recognize?

On a side note, I’ve always found it weird why HDDs or SSDs are/were sold with 128GB, 265GB, 512GB etc. when they are referring to decimal units.

I’m failing to understand why we would need decimal units at all. Whats the point of them? And why do the original units havr to change name to something as ridiculous as “Gibibyte” while the unnecessary decimal units get the binary’s old name?

Reject MiB, call it “MB” like it originally was.

They are not taking away any money from the existing funds. And that is the important thing IMO. Rather, they are using that large amount of money and investing it (safely) so that they generate surplus money that they use. Hiwever, they arent taking away money that is currently there.

They are just using the interests that this frozen capital generates and using that (instead of continuing to pay the interests to the Russians).

(Their point was that Spotify’s free version is sufficient because they only want the things mentioned)

Bro, “Puritanism” is a religious movement of the 16-17th century. Maybe you mean purism?

(Serious) question: How do you stand not being able to select individual tracks? I honestly would rather listen to my music in any of the free frontend apps rather than being limited to that extent…

Honestly, what does this change? For paid users nothing, and the free version was always unusable with you not being able to individually select songs.

If that’s Bitcoin then this would actually give you, at the current exchange rate of BTC to USD:

0.000000000002557444% USD. If you got that card once every milliscond, you would need 31 years to have 2.5$.

I doubt you’d be rich with one card except lol.

I was actually not aware of that… Makes more sense now.

Except I have cups in my kitchen that are double the size of other cups and I dont know which ones to use.

What part is wrong then? That’s pretty nuch what they say in the article.

If I understand this correctly, they are only using it to track terrorists who actively participated in a terror attack, right? What’s the big deal then…?

No, you tried shifting the discussion and when I told you what was being discussed, you simply said you’re uninterested.

First, you’re taking the U.S. at its word that there was anyone on its side in real danger.

No I’m not. I never claimed anyone was in danger.

Second, it’s laughable to take the premise of additional intelligence possibly endangering some spy and turning that into “this would kill all U.S. spies.”

Yeah it is and nobody did. I certainly didnt.

I don’t care about impossible thought experiments

Then don’t comment on one and don’t waste my time telling me that my answer to a morality question is “ridicolous” because it didn’t happen.

First, you’re taking the U.S. at its word that there was anyone on its side in real danger.

No, but the statement we are discussing assumes this from the start: “I would happily sacrifice the life of every single American spy abroad for a single innocent life.”

Second, it’s laughable to take the premise of additional intelligence possibly endangering some spy and turning that into “this would kill all U.S. spies.”

Yeah but we’re discussing the case where it would kill all spies. My statement was in response to (I repeat): “I would happily sacrifice the life of every single American spy abroad for a single innocent life.”

Finally, the U.S. has fucked over countless lackeys in the past and will continue to do so. Dying for your country is what these people already signed up for

Yeah but this is not “dying for your country” (it wouldnt benefit the USA in any way) but rather “dying for a single civilian of an adversary country”. They didnt sign up for that.

In this case yeah